Home‎ > ‎

The Canon Of Scripture

Book of Enoch

The term Son of Man is mentioned throughout the book of Enoch in reference to Jesus. Jesus called himself the Son of Man many times. The term Son of Man is only mentioned 1 time in the entire old testament in the book of Daniel. 

I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. Dan. 7:13-14 (With the broad knowledge of the Book of Enoch in the 1st century and the common usage of the term Son of Man within the book, Jesus' audience would have known exactly who he was claiming to be by calling himself that name. He was referencing his own title from the book of Enoch.)

Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.” Matt. 22:29-30 (No where in the Bible does it talk about this. Is Jesus wrong? Not if he is quoting from the book of Enoch, which he would be calling scripture.)

Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them: “See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones to judge everyone, and to convict all of them of all the ungodly acts they have committed in their ungodliness, and of all the defiant words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” Jude 1:14-15 (Jude, the brother of Jesus, quoted from the book of Enoch. Notice that he says that Enoch "prophesied." Using this word is important as it means that it is inspired of the Holy Spirit and is considered scripture.)

The conclusion on the book of enoch is that it was rightly not included in the Bible. God does not make mistakes. The reason is that the book was not preserved for us with the same number of manuscripts as the rest of scripture. I do believe the book of Enoch to be inspired and that it was considered scripture from those in the past. But with the lack of manuscripts, we can't read it as infallible. There can be inaccuracies within it. But the overall message still stands as truth. Just because its not apart of the canon doesn't make it worthless. It actually reveals to us details that the Bible leaves out. And the reasons the Bible leaves these details out is likely because the information is already contained in the book of Enoch.

Bible Translations And Sources

Different translations
-Geneva Bible
-Bishops Bible
-King James Version 1611
-KJV (King James Version)
-NKJV (New King James Version)
-NIV (New International Version)
-ASV (American Standard Version)
-ESV (English Standard Version)
-NASB (New American Standard Bible)
-RSV (Revised Standard Version)
-NRSV (New Revised Standard Version)

The Septuagint - is the earliest Greek translation of the original Old Testament Hebrew scriptures in the 3rd to 2nd century BC. The Septuagint was quoted from many times by the writers of the New Testament. It does include the Apocrypha. It was preserved by the church and considered scripture by the early church.

Textus Receptus - also called the "received text." It is the succession of printed Greek texts of the New Testament.

The Vulgate - a 4th-century Latin translation of the Bible that became the Catholic Church's official Latin version during the 16th century. It does include the Apocrypha as it is based on the Septuagint text.

The Masoretic Text - is the earliest existing Hebrew and Aramaic text of the 7th to 10th century Masoretes. It defines the Jewish Old Testament canon. It does not include the Apocrypha.

The Apocryphaare works disagreed upon whether they should be considered part of the canon or Psuedepigrapha. Protestants consider Apocrypha books to be of unknown authorship or of doubtful origin. The Apocrypha is a set of texts included in the Latin Vulgate and Septuagint but not in the Masoretic Text. Some consider these texts to be a secondary canon, and thus still inspired and authoritative. Protestants consider them apocryphal. They are however considered uninspired valuable texts at the very least.

The Psuedepigrapha - a work whose real author attributed it to a figure of the past or texts whose claimed author is not the true author. The label Psuedepigrapha does not of itself inauthenticate the text. Although many consider most of these texts to be inauthentic.